[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190827214613.9B896206E0@mail.kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 14:46:12 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>, shuah@...nel.org
Cc: kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, frowand.list@...il.com,
Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] kunit: fix failure to build without printk
Quoting Brendan Higgins (2019-08-27 10:49:32)
> Previously KUnit assumed that printk would always be present, which is
> not a valid assumption to make. Fix that by ifdefing out functions which
> directly depend on printk core functions similar to what dev_printk
> does.
>
> Reported-by: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kselftest/0352fae9-564f-4a97-715a-fabe016259df@kernel.org/T/#t
> Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@...gle.com>
> ---
Does kunit itself have any meaning if printk doesn't work? Why not just
depend on CONFIG_PRINTK for now?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists